Took less than an hour for him to return my call after leaving a message and then sending a subsequent email, I must say responsiveness has improved substantially since the exit of a certain individual who I won't bother naming (coughclaytoncough).

I asked specificially about the Third Eye loan and about the need to raise money and about the company nearing the convenated threshold of $5 million.  He said that they are obviously well aware of all the loand convenants and are looking at a number of different options to satisfy the loan.  Obviously he didn't disclose anything definitive or material, but he addded that the company's relationship with Third Eye is excellent and that they're in regular contact with them and that the lenders are well aware of what Resverlogix is focused on and trying to accomplish.

I reiterated to Paul what I've said here, that I have 0.1% concern over Don's ability to satisfy the loan but that its frustrating being in the dark...that I'm waiting for a PR announcing the raising of sufficient funds to satisfy the loan.  For my own reassurance I aked him that if Resverlogix raises $30/$40/$50 million (whatever) and retires the loan....that at that point the covenant to have top-line data out by Jan 31st, that its a dead issue.  He assured me that yes, that would be the case, the loan agreement would be satisfied with full re-payment.

As for the event rate....10 to 15 events per month and now being "over 200".  He said there's been a lot of discussion at senior levels about how to communicate to the market given the number of stakeholders watching, not just investors but others interested in the BET space.  This isn't a direct quote but its close:  'have there been months below that 10-15 number, its possible'.  The sense I get is that its more a less a loose range provided to give the market an indication of "in and around" the rate of MACE....I then remarked that in % terms 10-15 is a pretty wide range, he acknowledged that but left me with the impression that those are not hard fixed numbers....

I can envision them looking at 6 months of data and calculating about 75 events....however within those 6 months there perhaps months with only 4 or 5 events.  That's my own editorial comment.  

Finally I asked him if had any reservations about me sharing our conversation in this hub....and I said I take it as a given that this forum is monitored by him.  He said that nothing he told me is any different from what he'd tell anyone inquiring and that of course he had no problem with our conversation being shared.  He also said that Sarah monitors the board and that she will bring up pertinent information to him with respect to the posts here.